Notices tagged with gpl, page 5
-
I have begun a fork of !GPLv3 on GitHub: http://ur1.ca/9pucd !fsf !gnu
-
RT @fontana I have begun a fork of !GPLv3 on GitHub: http://ur1.ca/9pucd !fsf !gnu
-
I have begun a fork of !GPLv3 on GitHub: http://ur1.ca/9pucd !fsf !gnu
-
I have begun a fork of !GPLv3 on GitHub: http://ur1.ca/9pucd !fsf !gnu
-
I have begun a fork of !GPLv3 on GitHub: http://ur1.ca/9pucd !fsf !gnu
-
@lxoliva I often do that then correct myself. It's an odd phenomenon
-
Why the !GPL licensing cops are the good guys | !OpenSource Software - InfoWorld http://goo.gl/XddOj
-
#GPL use in !Debian on the rise: study - http://va.mu/VJiI
-
@lxoliva issue is, can you trust a company to release new software under #GPL given widespread abuse of GPL by proprietary relicensors
-
So, @bkuhn, I was actually considering re-licensing #libvisualid as `dual license, LGPL v3+ or !GPL v2+'....
-
@bkuhn, I'm looking at #LGPL v3 in relation to !GPL v2. It's interesting—stricter in some ways, looser in others.
-
So much ado about !GPL v3, nobody told me that there was a #LGPL v3 too—did nobody even notice it?
-
@ovidius, perhaps you can explain which clause in the #GPL you think Google's #remote-kill *is* violating? ☺
-
@arnebab, `modified !GPL for postcard !art' seems `just like !CC By-SA, except incompatible with the most popular !FreeCulture art license'☹
-
@arnebab, !CC By-SA seems a better bet for artwork; I considered dualing w/ !GPL, seems like a can of worms—forks might not be recombinable.
-
@laurelrusswurm, that's a !copyright question un-peculiar to !CC, I think; !FreeSoftware & the !GPL went through this: http://ur1.ca/2rmcm
-
@leorockway & @spikeb, I'm pretty sure #GPL & #CC-BY-SA *aren't* compatible: http://ur1.ca/17175